Balancing AI Innovation and Copyright Protection: A Comparative Analysis of The United Kingdom's Proposed Text and Data Mining Framework and The European Union's TDM Exception
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.66304/IJGIMR.2026.v1i1.22Keywords:
Artificial Intelligence, Copyright Law, Text and Data Mining, European Union, United Kingdom, Intellectual Property, AI RegulationAbstract
The swift emergence of artificial intelligence (AI) has revolutionized the global innovation landscape but also presents unprecedented challenges for copyright law. AI systems depend on text and data mining (TDM) techniques to train algorithms using large amounts of copyrighted content. This has raised concerns about authors’ rights, licensing obligations, and fair compensation. The European Union (EU) and the United Kingdom (UK) have taken different approaches to the regulation of TDM activities. The EU has implemented a structured TDM exception in the Digital Single Market Directive, and the UK has considered alternative policy models in its copyright and AI consultations. This article adopts a doctrinal and comparative legal methodology to examine such competing frameworks and assess their effectiveness in balancing technological innovation and copyright protection. The study concludes that a hybrid regulatory model that combines transparency, licensing mechanisms, and effective opt-out rights provides the most sustainable path for future copyright governance in the AI era.
References
Abbott, R. (2020). The reasonable robot: Artificial intelligence and the law. Cambridge University Press.
Bently, L., Sherman, B., Gangjee, D., & Johnson, P. (2022). Intellectual property law (6th ed.). Oxford University Press.
Derclaye, E. (2024). Copyright exceptions and artificial intelligence training data in Europe. European Intellectual Property Review, 46(2), 73–89.
European Commission. (2020). Guidance on Article 17 of Directive 2019/790 on copyright in the Digital Single Market. Publications Office of the European Union.
European Commission. (2024). Study on copyright and artificial intelligence. Publications Office of the European Union.
European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2019). Directive (EU) 2019/790 on copyright and related rights in the Digital Single Market and amending Directives 96/9/EC and 2001/29/EC. Official Journal of the European Union, L130, 92–125.
Gervais, D. J. (2022). Artificial intelligence and copyright: Challenges and opportunities. Oxford University Press.
Geiger, C., & Frosio, G. (2021). The European Union copyright directive and text and data mining: A balancing exercise. International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 52(4), 415–438.
Guadamuz, A. (2023). Generative AI, copyright, and text and data mining. Computer Law & Security Review, 49, 105789.
Hugenholtz, P. B. (2021). Copyright and artificial intelligence: Authors, robots and research. IIC – International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law, 52(9), 1145–1163.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2024). OECD framework for artificial intelligence governance. OECD Publishing.
Pila, J., & Torremans, P. (2019). European intellectual property law (3rd ed.). Oxford University Press.
Samuelson, P. (2023). Generative AI meets copyright law. Communications of the ACM, 66(11), 20–24.
Senftleben, M. (2020). Copyright, data access, and artificial intelligence: Facilitating text and data mining through exceptions and limitations. Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice, 15(5), 367–378.
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office. (2021). Artificial intelligence and intellectual property: Copyright and patents consultation response. UK Government.
United Kingdom Intellectual Property Office. (2024). Copyright and artificial intelligence consultation paper. UK Government.
United Kingdom. (1988). Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (c. 48). The Stationery Office.
World Intellectual Property Organization. (2020). WIPO conversation on intellectual property and artificial intelligence. WIPO.
World Intellectual Property Organization. (2024). Generative artificial intelligence and intellectual property policy considerations. WIPO.
Yu, P. K. (2023). Artificial intelligence, copyright law, and data governance. Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal, 33(4), 875–924.
Getty Images (US), Inc. v. Stability AI Ltd., High Court of Justice (England and Wales), ongoing litigation.
Andersen v. Stability AI Ltd., No. 3:23-cv-00201 (N.D. California, 2023).
The New York Times Company v. OpenAI, Inc. and Microsoft Corporation, No. 1:23-cv-11195 (S.D.N.Y., 2023).
